₦airaland Forum

It isn't that unusual seeing a man in UK carry a baby on his back or front especially with a baby carrier. Perhaps the wrapper itself is the only unusual thing.No big deal.

Rossikk:
Thanks. The question was ''Who wrote the New testament?'', not ''what we know the authors as''. Too much long story in your link, which does not address the question.

To be clear,according to CC tradition Matthew, Mark, Luke and John wrote the gospels.Paul wrote a number of books as did Jude.Luke and John wrote a couple of other NT books as well.
The link provided is detailed but gives a breakdown of how books were attributed to authors and how they got accepted as scripture. I'll urge you to read through thoroughly.

OP,very good question. We know the authors of the gospels as Matthew, Mark, Luke and John by Catholic Church sacred tradition. Obviously CC tradition is another discussion but please check this encyclopedia link for a breakdown of the NT authorship and acceptance when you get a few minutes. http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03274a.htm

So many things to consider eg.her state of mind prior to the act,was she fully in control mentally?etc.Only God can judge in any case,even those who feel they're holier than everyone else will be judged.

Good morning all, happy Sunday.
Let's continue to pray for the reunion of the Catholic and Orthodox Church as Pope Francis meets with Patriarch Barthotholomew in Turkey,that they may once again be in communion as one church.

OLAADEGBU:
How are your traditions God breathed especially when they are opposed the inspired Word of God?

Please can you clarify how you conclude that the sacred traditions of the CC are opposed to the inspired Word of God.
Also, how do you know what the inspired Word of God is?

OLAADEGBU:
The Scriptures alone are God breathed, your traditions are not.

Bros,you're way off and the opposite of what's taught in 2 Thes 2 : 15 for eg. BTW, Did Jesus not breath on the apostles to establish the sacrament of reconciliation?

Scriptures can only be properly understood within the context of the sacred tradition set forth within the church. If this tradition is not God breathed, there is no way you can believe the scriptures.

Good morning all, happy Corpus Christi.I pray that we continue to let Christ reign in our hearts for he is King now and forever.
God bless.

Hail Redeemer, King divine!
Priest and Lamb, the throne is thine; 
King, whose reign shall never cease,
Prince of everlasting peace.


Angels, saints and nations sing : 
"Praise be Jesus Christ our King; 
Lord of life, earth, sky and sea, 
King of love on Calvary!"
》》

I love this hymn.Praise be Jesus our King.

Whynotthetruth:
Bro, its not by luck but by dint of hardwork and conscious effort of people especially GEj as C in C and our military, paramilitary and police force who put their life on the line for you and me...God bless them.
Part of what will help us eradicate it is for you and others to stop spreading false information and false alarm which is what the insurgents desire(terrorism thrive on lies, fear and propaganda)... why not stop feeding terrorism indirectly and feed our national strength and unity...
What do you have for opposition that always talk of bomb explosions but say nothing about our military efforts to curtail them? What have you to say about APC national chairman (Oyegun) who always complain and campaign with our lost territories to insurgents but turn around to say when such territories were regained that army regaining such is not worth celebrating(cf Oyegun on Chibok town last week according to Punch newspaper)? who is he supporting; our army or insurgents
Thank God, you acknowledged that bombs once came to abuja but has been curtailed to just a section now...
Believe me, the goodies are so much more than the bad...anyway, it depends on what you wanna dissipate energy on...

Unfortunately, by trying to sweep issues under the carpet they never get resolved (I believe there was also a denial about the 200 girls before international pressure). Terrorism is a problem in Nigeria that’s a fact and it has not been stopped. What will the govt do about that? We are talking about terrorists bombing people’s lives(even school children) with perceived impunity but you accuse me and others of spreading false information!!
As much as you try to defend Govt’s work, the fact is the fact. There’s probably some work being done to stop the bombings ( and kudos to honest military guys), however, whatever’s been done is not working. Govt needs to change tact and take out this menace of terrorism. Shikena.
BTW, the opposition is just there to keep a check on Govt, they are not the Govt. All the Govt needs to do is prove them wrong by making tangible changes. The people will then talk highly of Govt.

Godogwu:
I completely agree. He was probably naive of the effect this would bring. Nonetheless there is only so much he can do as a president that could stop these terrorists for good and release this girls. Its a very sticky situation to be honest, not to make excuses for the president but I doubt he has just been folding his arms and doing nothing over this issue.

Unfortunately, the buck has to stop with someone and in this case it's the president. Part of the role is to deal with weighty issues whether by putting in the right team or leading..As long as the bombing persists the top man gets all the blame.
He has to do what he has to do(legally) to protect human lives,this should take up most of the president's time until resolved. People's perception is that the bombings are increasing.

Whynotthetruth:
Very good!!! Now is the food not more now under GEJ (via agricultural transformation) ...our water resources has improved(via over 15 new dams & irrigation sites),...finally; security. Can we because of insecurity due to insurgency in north eastern part of Nigeria say that Nigeria is insecure? don't you think its fallacy of generalization which is outrightly wrong and incorrect... Do you think if Nigeria is that insecure as you think, that our FDI will be increasing tremendously as it is now...and our economy growing at over 6.5% as observed by IMF and others...or is IMF part of PDP now?

There might be some good however not far reaching enough. The fact is there is insecurity in Nigeria,this being mainly in the NE is probably down to luck.I don't see what stops it from spreading. We've seen bombings in the capital for instance.
Also as a comparison,please look back at the 9 11 attacks.this was focused on the NE but was deemed an attack on the USA and dealt with as such.
the incessant bombings in Nigeria are a hindrance to real progress and needs to be addressed.

MuhdG:
I have only one sentence for you.

If the masses are not safe, Mr president is just wasting his time

I agree,after the basics of food,water and air,humans need security - without this nothing else really matters.you can say that the security issues in the country outweigh any good there might be. Focus needs to be on securing people's lives.

veecovee:
in Bible start now from the book of John

Please tell me why the bible. I understand another book teaches something different.

Ukutsgp:
i dnt believe baptism saves and remove original sins. infants does not have original sins.

i said it is wrong to do so cos no infants was baptised in the bible. someone must reach the age of accountability before he or she will be baptised.

are u aware that the Lutherans(1st sola scriptura adherents) and other protestant denominations believe babies do have original sin.
do you see how it's impossible to justify sola scriptura when you all believe different things.

Ukutsgp:
do u think that ur useless traditions is the bible?

Bros,I asked a simple question - but why the bible? You came back with an insult.!
At least,try to answer the question.

vest:
Quesion Answerukuts Style

I really tire.

Ukutsgp:
circumcision and baptism are two different thing. dnt muddled them up. i dnt see hw baptism replaced circumcision. it is ur own twisted view.

Please do some research into christian history and because you don't see how something happened doesn't mean it didn't happen.
You could also try to explain what Paul meant in Col 2:11▶.

Ukutsgp:
how can u baptised someone who dnt know or believe Jesus yet?

this is why one requires guidance in determining christian doctrines.In the OT,babies were circumcised into the Jewish faith. What do you think replaced Circumcision in the NT? Please see Col 2:11-12.Paul knows something via tradition here.

sukkot:
the bible

But why the bible?

sukkot:
no they are not christians. being a christian means following the teachings of Jesus Christ. roman catholics follow ther own teachings. they deify and worship mary. they are not christians

Please help me,where do I find these teachings of Jesus Christ?

Aki and Pawpaw
Suwe and Opebe

I wonder why you haven't given us this answer from sola scriptura?
By the way, Your reference site acknowledges the early church did a lot then downplays the whole thing by stating it was God alone who put the canon together.why try to downplay the role of the church he established because you want to score cheap points?

Doesn't the article indicate that there couldn't have been sola scriptura in early christianity as you non catholics try to claim?

Reading through the poster's copy & paste material, it amazes me that he can justify the books in the protestant OT that were never quoted from in the NT e.g. songs of Solomon, Esther, Ecclesiastes but has an issue with the deutero-canonicals.
This all means his conclusions are down to Protestant tradition.

vfactor:
Why do u think Paul wasnt teaching sola scriptura, wen he reminded the christians in Corinth of a rule they already knew, in solving an issue? You should give me a better reason, than say one has look at the entire scripture.

By applying your own reasoning, did you not quote 2 Thess 2:15 out of context? And you re not reading your own meaning into it? From the whole bible u've read, where the did Paul or any other apostle give instructions for christians to start a tradition or doctrine that was contrary to the OT and the Teachings of Jesus? Most of what the apostles wrote were explanations on the OT prophecies/psalms, revelations and expansion on the teachings of Christ (just as Jesus promised that the holy spirit would teach them). These teachings had scriptural backing. But today the catholic church has brought in teachings, like celibacy of priest, purgatory, praying to saints instead of God, etc, that cannot be backed with any scripture. I'll like you to show me one tradition that the apostles started that didnt have any backing frm either the OT or Jesus' teachings, then i'll believe you.

Paul couldn't have been teaching sola scriptura because without guidance you end up with a situation where everyone comes up with their own doctrine.
2 Thess 2:15 was not quoted out of context as the previous verses refers to Paul talking with the Thessalonians previously. Please read v2, v5 and v14.
Also read the 2 Tim2:2 – and what you have heard from me through many witnesses entrust to faithful people who will be able to teach others as well.

And 1 Cor 11:2 - I commend you because you remember me in everything and [b]maintain the traditions just as I handed them on to you
It is not tradition vs scriptures but tradition & scriptures. The scriptures are best understood and interpreted within the set sacred tradition.
The tradition (not changeable disciplines like priestly celibacy) we speak about is how you determine what are the valid Christian doctrines especially in view of Heresies.( People teaching a different doctrine from the established tradition). For instance, If I ask what is believed about the Holy Eucharist(John 6), the majority of protestants will say this is just a symbol whereas the established tradition has this has the body and blood of Jesus Christ – both views coming from the same scriptures.
Also teachings on purgatory etc.

Please see this quote from an early church father, Irenaeus
As I said before, the Church, having received this preaching and this faith, although she is disseminated throughout the whole world, yet guarded it, as if she occupied but one house. She likewise believes these things just as if she had but one soul and one and the same heart; and harmoniously she proclaims them and teaches them and hands them down, as if she possessed but one mouth. For, while the languages of the world are diverse, nevertheless, the authority of the tradition is one and the same" (Against Heresies 1:10:2 [A.D. 189]).

Regarding use of Tradition in the NT – Jesus mentions the Pharisees seating on Moses Chair in Matt 23 but you don’t see Moses’ chair in the OT.
Paul remembered Jesus words in Matt 23 – It is more blessed to give than to receive. You don’t see this recorded in the Gospels.

vfactor:
There is a Big DIFFERENCE between the Jerusalem Council and the Nicaea Council - The SCRIPTURES. The apostles and elders in Jerusalem, used the Scriptures and the dealings of God with the Apostles (Peter to Conelius, Paul & Barnabas to the Gentiles) to draw conclusions on the issue of circumcision. The Nicaea Council, didn't dare to even reason the scriptures. That's the difference.

I heard the Pope has dismissed the Genesis account of creation as an allegory, instead embracing evolution (which scientist themselves do not accept and there's little evidence to back up). Such is what happens wen you choose to disregard what God's word says and stick with human wisdom.

very soon, the portions of the bible that condemns homosexual acts will be removed and replaced.

I can see you've got a big issue with Nicea?Do you worship at one of the organisations that rejects the Nicean Council?
You're wrong for thinking the Council of Nicea referenced no scriptures. - Please actually research what happened at this Council. Wikipedia is a good starting point - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Council_of_Nicaea
Just so you know, councils are called to deal with specific issues. During this time it was the Arian Heresis, which in effect taught that Jesus was not God with proves from the same scriptures.

Also, you need to research what the pope actually said and the CC teaching with regard to creation and evolution. Please read paragraphs 159, 283 and 284 of the catholic cathecism (free on the internet). The CC leaves open the actual events that occured during creation and the pope statement was along those lines.
The CC will never remove and replace any portion of the bible. in fact it defined what books make up the bible and declared these God's word. You may be surprised that it was the protestants(starting with Martin Luther) that removed portions of the bible - 7 whole books!!

@Vest,I'm catholic because the CC has the fullness of christian truth.It claims it is the church established by Christ and I believe this by looking through its history and seeing how authoritative it has been. Even today the CC continues to act with this authority in defining and maintaining Christian faith..
If it was just about a book then I wonder how people have been able to decide which book to follow out of the plethora of religions.

vfactor:
so what message do you think Paul was trying to pass to the Corinthians, by telling them not to beyond what is written, when (to you) the problem is about being arrogant.

It's clear what Paul was driving at. When people start going beyond what the bible says, they develop pride and arrogance. Maybe they feel that they are educated in worldly wisdom and can add to what the scriptures say. So Paul reminded them of a RULE (which was already know) not to go beyond what is written.

Yes Paul was certainly pointing them to scriptures to address a particular issue, it doesn't mean he was teaching sola scriptura.
One needs to look at the scriptures as a whole and not point to verses here and there without context, otherwise you miss verses like 2Thess2:15 - Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.

So you're only reading sola scriptura into 1 Corinthians 4:6 not what it actually says.

vfactor:
I'll show you, since you don't know. Read, please 1 Corinthians chapter 4 verse 6 and see what the bible says going beyond what is written in it for doctrine.

This does not teach sola scriptura, you need to quote verses within its context. He was trying to address the Corinthians behaviour (not to be boastful,arrongant) Please read the preceeding Chapters (especially Chapter 1 and end of 3) to get the full context - he quotes the OT where he says it is written.
If we were to go with your logic, would you be going beyond what is written by quoting Paul?

vfactor:
I don't need to find out. I already know. The early Christians during the first century after Christ's death relied heavily on the scriptures available to them at that time. For example read for yourself how they resolved the issue of circumcision that arose at that time, by using the Hebrew Scriptures (OT) (Act chapter 15). They didn't depend on any traditions or personal opinions from fellow apostles (not even Peter himself, who Catholics assume to be d first pope).

It was after the death of the last Apostle John, that human traditions and pagan philosophies began to creep into Christianity. The Nicaea Council was renowned for disregarding the known word of God (OT and writings of the apostles) and infusing the pagan philosophies of Plato and Socrates in Christianity which has lead to many spurious and false teachings we have today (Catholics and protestants alike)

If you already know, then I'm surprised you believe sola scriptura was practiced by the early church. Yes the church had the OT but how did the OT scriptures suddenly become the whole bible? The mere fact that that Paul and Barnabas had to defer to the church to discuss the issue of circumcision in Acts 15 disproves your sola scriptura (afterall it should have been clear from the scriptures what the teaching on circumcision was).
Questions -
how did the book of Acts become scripture?
If you don't believe in the Nicea Council, why do you believe in the council of Jerusalem?
It'll be good to know how you got the knowledge that so called human traditions crept into christianity after the death of John and not before.
Are you aware that Jesus said the gates of hell shall not prevail against the church - which meant he protected the church in its teachings?

vfactor:
So how do you 'hear' the 'word' of God?
If the gospel account about Jesus was not written down, how would we have known what we know about his teachings and ministry?

Your explanation is just an excuse to bring in all sorts of tradition of men into Christianity and water down God's command. It's not the first time it's been done and the catholic church is not doing something new by bringing in traditions of men in place of the word of God. The Pharisees did similarly things during Jesus' time and you can read what he told them for yourself in Mark 7:6-9.

You might want to find out how the church existed without the NT in the early decades. i'm sure you're aware that the earliest books were not even written for more than 15 years after the event. Also, there was no consensus on the make up of the bible until late 4th century.
This means the christians were guided by the church, that was guided by the Holy Spirit as promised by Jesus. This continues to happen.
The books were written to the established church.
Food for Thought - it is well known that Apostle Thomas helped set up christianity in South India but we do not have Thomas' scriptures in the bible. How do you think christianity spread there?

Sola Scriptura is a novel doctrine started by Martin Luther in the 16th while splitting from the CC. As much as he had good intentions in trying to reform the church, he ended up breaking away. We now see what Sola Scriptura has caused with every Pastor Taiwo, Evangelist Ola and prophet Theophilus thinking they have the right doctrines all based on this same sola scriptura ( basically, conflicting doctrines among thousands of competing denominations)